illustrates how the C3 architecture of the organizational unit can influence its performance. Reasoning about the unit requires understanding not just how the individual agents perform their roles, but also how the distribution of resources and tasks across personnel and the specific C3 architecture constrain individual action, alter the flow of information, and ultimately influence the unit's performance. If appropriate computational models of organizational units and their C3 structures were available, one could begin to reason about questions regarding the design of C3 architectures such as that of the Vincennes. One could also reason about the behavior of other structures, such as coalition C3 and the overall behavior of opposing forces.

The purpose of this chapter is to describe current computational approaches to modeling of C3 architectures and the tools and techniques needed to reason about C3. The focus is on unit-level models in which each of the actors (commander and subordinates) is modeled, as well as some of the factors and procedures that link these actors together. Thus, a unit-level model of a fixed air wing might model each team member, along with the lines of communication and types of messages, reporting functions, norms about contacting or not contacting others, social knowledge about how to operate as a team, intelligence about what to do when one or more team members become disabled, the tasks, the authority structure, the procedures, differences in actors due to physical position, available resources, training both individually and as a team, and military level. We might characterize such C3 models as social agent models in which there are multiple agents connected by one or more networks.

Such computational models of organizational units have a large number of potential uses in military settings. For example, imagine a man-in-the-loop simulation used for training a brigade commander and staff. Unit-level models could be used to simulate the behavior of units under the commander's direction. Realistic models of the subordinate units would enable the commander to use more realistic simulations of battle engagements to explore the impact of communication losses, personnel losses, manpower reduction, misunderstanding of orders, resource attrition, and so on. Having such models would also reduce training costs as not all units would have to be present at the same time. Moreover, units could take part in joint task force operations without the complete unit being sent. As another example, imagine a computational model of information flow in a C3 architecture. Realistic unit-level models could be used by commanders to perform a series of "what if" analyses that would help determine the relative merits of putting in place various types of information and communications equipment. Models of the organizational unit could also be used for examining resource reallocation strategies, determining the fragility or flexibility of an organizational unit under stress, and exploring viable adaptation strategies. Computational models of the unit's C3 structure may also be an important part of planning modules. Finally, C3 models could be useful in determining areas of vulnerability in opposing forces.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement